Joining Scotland to the UK in the XVIII century was a bargain profitable and politically justified. In 1-x, Scotland retained considerable autonomy. In-2, she received a substantial economic benefits: access to the market of Great Britain and its then colonies. As things stand now, a century XXI?
"Since that time, Scotland is the most segregated in the middle of all the autonomous regions of England. There is a parliament, the church and the legal system. Scottish legislation provides for a very decent social benefits, particularly for students and pensioners. They are paid from the general state treasury, ie, including the expense of the British taxpayer. On the social costs of the country's annual Scots get on everyone to 1.600 pounds (about $ 2,460) more than the inhabitants of the United Kingdom. With all the benefits that are only available Scots. For example, a student from the UK for training in the Scottish institute has to pay about 9,000 pounds (about $ 13,830) a year, while for the local inhabitant of education will be free "(source: Federal Internet edition of "Capital of the country," Yashin GA).
Actually, not so radiantly. Another quote:
"The Conservative Party is almost gone from the political scene of Scotland to the top of the 1990s, paid the price for neo-liberal economic reforms of Margaret Thatcher. In a region whose economy is generally relied on heavy industry, many businesses were closed, 10 of thousands of people out of work, which led to a sharp fall in living standards. In addition, the Tories have taken a strong stand on the issue of devolution (transfer of mandatory features on-site), which is completely undermined the credibility of the local population. In the elections of 1997, the English Parliament was not elected either 1st candidate of the conservatives in the elections of 2010 — just one. In this regard, there was even a joke that more pandas in Edinburgh zoo than conservatives.
Since that time, the Labour Party was the only political force that could oppose nationalism. Its social-democratic program that appeals to the majority of Scots, the reality was so identical with applets nationalists that instead of debates about whose better programm, favorites 2-parties usually argue about who is who borrowed ideas.
When under the influence of external factors — the war in Iraq, the economic crisis of 2008 — the policy of the Labour government has lost the support of the population, including in Scotland, a place for the arrival of the nationalists was cleared.
The second main engine support for the Scottish national party was the economic crisis. In the conditions of impermanence population became more receptive to the theses of nationalists that small countries better manage the crisis than large. With the newest force sounded the idea that Scotland to seek control over the natural resources within its territorial waters: oil and gas fields. In the case of separation from their income accounted for over 10% of Scotland's GDP, which would be the best insurance against the likely economic problems, assured supporters of independence "(source: "Nezavisimaya Gazeta", Olga Trinity).
As we see, there is unsullied economy: unemployment, crisis, oil prices. No actually nationalist circumstances to separate Scotland from the UK no. "The referendum on Scottish independence also would raise questions about the involvement of Scotland in the payment of the English national debt, site of the new countries in the European Union, rassredotachivanii natural resources, and the future of British nuclear submarines, which are based on the west coast of Scotland" (source: "Sight"). "London will also have to clean up the Scottish countryside with nuclear missiles Trident — where it is not clear, as other bases for the storage of nuclear arsenals in the country does not" (source: Federal Internet edition of "Capital of the country," Yashin GA). Yes, nothing nationalistic, entirely business matters.
At the current time in the UK is not a debate about whether to separate or not to separate, and for what reasons, but the timing of the referendum in Scotland on-exit absenteeism. There are two main points of view: in 2013 (the point of view of the British Government) and autumn 2014 (the point of view of Alex Salmond, the Scottish First Minister and concurrently head of the SNP — Scottish state party). And Salmond insists also on how to give the right to vote in the referendum and minors — persons 16 years of age. David Cameron, the British prime minister, obviously stands for the unity of Britain.
Two big politics — Scottish and the UK — simply can not argue with each other. Cameron needs to be seen in almost all impartial. After all, the SNP was going to hold a referendum in 2008 — but it prevented to do so gryanuvshy cash crisis shook the entire world economy. I wonder what's next economic crisis was more a prerequisite for the referendum: born to light the thesis, as if small countries managed the crisis better than great. Subject referendum on secession was raised again in the spring of 2011, when the SNP defeated in the election — and, one might say, "dry", so that in Scotland was formed a single-party government.
"…" In the past (local) elections, Alex Salmond has asked me to give him a mandate to hold a referendum. He won the election. He received his own mandate. I asked him to referendum, he refused — which still happens in the end? "- Cameron protested, saying that Edinburgh unhappy with the proposal for a vote as London can be faster.
Further English Prime accused Salmond in a constant change in the wording of questions put to the vote. London insists on plain wording of the question of independence ("for" or "against"), Edinburgh did not rule out the second issue of "maximum devolution" (actually full autonomy in the conduct for which the central government will only defense and foreign policy). London fears that such an "interim" version will score more adherents than the full independence "(source: «News — Georgia").
And Salmond is able to find suitable reasons:
party leader Alex Salmond was First Minister of Scotland, the last four years and has not yet ventured to hold a referendum on independence. Prior to today's election, he also repeatedly made aware that a win will not rush to plebiscite, as his main concern is the recovery of the economy from the effects of the crisis.
While there was a vote count, Salmond said that in the case of a majority in parliament, he will hold a referendum on Scottish independence within the next 5 years. Favourite Scottish state party also said that at first he will claim greater economic freedom for the Scottish Parliament, including the right to the income tax.
"Scottish people showed their trust in us, and we must trust its own people — said Alex Salmond. — Because during the new parliamentary term, we will hold a referendum, allowing the people of Scotland to decide the constitutional future of the country "- promised Salmond" (source: "Russian service of BBC»).
So Makar, Alex Salmond, who said about the next 5 years, it is not contrary for himself. In general, talk about the deliberate procrastination date of the referendum is still necessary. And in other words, the reason — is not financial but political:
"The fact is that in 2014, in Glasgow, a status held sporting event — Commonwealth Games will also host a celebration of the 700th anniversary of the defeat of the Scots army of British King Edward II at Bannockburn. Nationalists believe that these two actions will increase the number of supporters of independence "(source: "Hvilya", Denis Ivanenko).
Scot Scot Salmond objects to Jack McConnell, Lord Glenskorrodeyl — a man past the first minister of 5 and a half years, until the defeat in 2007, the Labour Party in the elections. McConnell believes that a referendum is necessary over the next 18 months. According to the Scottish Political Editor "The Daily Telegraph" Simon Johnson, "uncertainty and disagreement about the timing of the referendum," according to the ex-minister, "can only delay our recovery from the recession." According to the article, Johnson, Jack McConnell very concerned "benefit the economy." Immediately indicates that the Church of Scotland opposes order to vote in a referendum 16 — and 17-year-olds.
The same Johnson in his article the other, "Michael Moore attacks the" strange concept "independence Alex Salmond '("The Daily Telegraph") Leads outlook Michael Moore, a member of the Liberal Democratic Party over taxes and spending in the proposed independent Scotland. In the speech in St. Andrews Moore said that "separatists have clearly realize what kind of economy-independent Scotland would have." According to him, by 2008 Scotland had in mind prosperous Ireland, Iceland and Norway. But here's the Irish economy began to decline, and Iceland went bankrupt — and saw Salmond center to follow in the east, in Scandinavia. But Moore questioned the Scots would be able to provide for themselves the highest — such as in the Scandinavian countries — the level of municipal services without an increase in the separate Scottish income tax, business tax and VAT. Moore gave examples: if the British government takes about 37% of the income tax, the Government of Norway takes is 41.1%, Sweden — 47%, and in Denmark — 48.1%. But Stewart Hosie of the SNP Moore told the words "grave mistake" and added that the tax on the company can be reduced to 20%.
And here's another curious political editor of Johnson's article: "Oil-rich northern islands of Scotland Alex Salmond they say: we could stay with the UK '("The Daily Telegraph"). The journalist knows that the Orkney and Shetland Islands in no hurry to meet Salmond and plans to separate from Britain. On the contrary, even if the rest of Scotland will vote for secession, they can stay in the UK. Not many of these islands "could even declare independence themselves."
Here, again, the question of benefits: "… they could not agree to join the independent Scotland only if the provision of a much larger part of the North Sea oil and gas reserves, a quarter of which is in the waters of the Shetland alone."
So now we are talking about voting on the islands. This thorny issue has political implications: The inhabitants of naming the islands "were usually very aggressive towards Scottish independence" and he chose the Westminster government. These islands were "not part of Scotland, and Norway — to the end of the XV century."
It is interesting also that: "the SNP previously recognized the right of the islands to decide their future, but Nicola Sturzhon, Deputy First Minister, recently angered residents, saying that it would be incorrect since they are -" not a nation. "
Indignation — indignation, but once the island are now in Scotland, they would have, if it is the will of the Scottish people, at first to secede from the United Kingdom, and later read much of his independence or negotiable adherence to the remains of the English Crown. The fate of the islands rests simply in the number of votes:
"The threat of a referendum is that the wishes of about 42,500 inhabitants Shetland and Orkney islands are drowned out by millions of people living in Glasgow and Edinburgh …"
And more from the article: "When local authorities Shetland 35 years ago conducted a referendum and asked the question, whether the inhabitants want to be part of independent Scotland, the result was nine against one."
So Makar, the inhabitants of the islands are not enough, but the oil and gas from many of them. Easy math: a lot of oil and not a lot of people — better than a lot of people and not enough oil. Hence the debate about disconnecting from Scotland, even without disconnecting from England.
Politicians break a lance, and yet the alleged separation of Scotland and Britain urges investors to think about the suspension finansovlozheny to the economy of Scotland: as well as it will separate — and then what? Domestic investment turned into international? And what are taxes? And if there are any custom duties? And if Scotland perceive the EU, you do not have to convert pounds into euros, down on the difference in rates? Etc., etc. These questions are asked at the moment.
Because, as is thought, overcoming the consequences of the crisis of the 1st, the Scottish supporters of full independence might drag the country into another — not global and the local, so to speak, a man-made. And then their political actions fall down in value. Hardly Salmond does not realize it. Still, the SNP is planning a referendum in the autumn of 2014. Investments investments, and the SNP may have believed that Scotland will be good to live with her and oil and gas.
With all this favorite Scottish state party perfectly clear that his country UK banks to 287 billion dollars. Salmond refers to this astronomical sum from a purely Scottish humor. "The arguments in this matter Salmond sensual and devoid of logic. Like, you're in command, you and answer why the bank almost collapsed … "(source: "Hvilya", Denis Ivanenko).
In short, the economy in the alleged separation much more than politics: the second is only the first reinforcement. No nationalist hatred, one benefit. That, by the way, is confirmed by the figures:
"Today, 40% of the inhabitants of Scotland want independence, while 43% prefer to remain part of the United Kingdom. With all of this two-thirds of Scots would vote for independence if their standard of living will rise by at least £ 500 a year ($ 770). It is
interesting that the separation of Scotland are positive and 43% of Britons oppose it only 32%. Many British are convinced that this event would be beneficial not only to the Scottish economy, and on the situation in other parts of the UK "(source: Federal Internet edition of "Capital of the country," Yashin GA).
You see, as is the case? 40 percent as if by a magic wand converted to two-thirds. For a complete happiness Scots lack not actually independence, but five hundred extra pounds on his brother.
Along with this you need to know that from former economic greatness of Britain was now worthless zilch:
"The whole industry, once considered an emblem of British chic and might disappear before our eyes. Such a fate is realized, for example, the English car industry. In the crisis period for him the British did not have to buy the Russian manufacturer or prohibit the entry of foreign cars, but simply sold their brands. In the end, the well-known brands almost went hand — at first they took the Germans and the Americans, and now they belong to the Chinese and Indians. Jaguar and Land Rover yielding Indian Tata Motors (95% of revenue for the IV quarter 2011).
Britain is nothing to not only build cars, and build roads. Not so long ago, the government presented a plan of large-scale transfer of British roads in the long-term lease personal investors. Great hope for all that are assigned to the Chinese businessmen.
To patch up the £ 42-billion hole in the budget, the government must also constantly cut military spending, including the number of fighter army. Commander John Maksvorfi, the founder and head of the Association of National Defense of England, said that if this trend continues in 2020 the British army simply ceased to exist.
It is rarely mentioned, but the size of the external debt ($ 9.8 trillion). Britain takes second place behind the United States ($ 14.7 trillion.). English Greek debt exceeds by 18 times! Outside the country's debt is 436% of GDP. So Britain now comes one of the leading economies in the world, faster, by inertia "(source: Federal Internet edition of "Capital of the country," Yashin GA).
I do not think that Cameron, who admitted the will of the Scottish people, easily forgive Scotland 287 billion dollars. In such a situation, they do not completely prevent the UK. But, on the other hand, that Cameron is — apart from the contemplation of the sad fate of the former empire?
And there is also increasing unemployment, which in England is at the moment more than 8%.
From that of the inhabitants of Britain's economic misery began to look into the bottle:
"The British drink too much more obvious. Prime Minister David Cameron has equated alcohol abuse a national emergency. In various parts of the country open network sobering-up stations — to nedavneshnego time pyanchuzhek then carefully brought to the "emergency" in the clinic and patient brought to life, defying all of the real patients languishing in the emergency room "(source: Federal Internet edition of "Capital of the country," Yashin GA). In appendage, "… through the public health system every year takes about 250 thousand mistakes that are cause of death of more than 3,600 patients. Alone in the middle of British doctors errors over 5 years increased by 28%. Once a year, they forgets in the bodies of patients more than 700 instruments, injure healthy organs — such cases over 5 years was 33% more. On average, doctors are causing "serious harm" 11-unhealthy once a day. Doctors systematic negligence or incompetence, no blood transfusions customers of the group, appoint or administered the wrong medicine "(GA Yashin, the same source).
At the end of the day, and morality in Britain fell through the floor. The government is going to allow couples to "non-traditional" orientation to formalize their business and even get married in the church. Almost half of the inhabitants of the country now approves gay marriage. It is logical that the family institution in the country is very weak. Children in Britain completely blossomed:
"Children are taught to knock on the" bad "parents in the school, the police and special services. Ten-man knows his rights and threatening to the tribunal on the parents if they would punish him.
English children in the last decade in the lead in all matters relating to anti-social behavior. Here are the statistics anti-record 15-year-old British. Often fall into a state of intoxication 27% of Brits, 12% of Germans, Italians, 5% and 3% of the French. Participated in at least one skirmish in the last year: 49% of British teenagers, 38% of French and Italian, 28% German. Have a sexy experience 38% of Britons, 28% of Germans, 24% of Italians and 22% of French. Great Britain established the European record for the number of teenage pregnancies.
But society is not sounding the alarm. Adults can no longer be afraid or affect the runaway teens. Instead of morality teenagers, for example, offered free condoms and contraceptives. Girls from the age of 13 without any prescription can get any number of birth control pills, visiting a local pharmacist, who, for all this will not tell their parents. So in Britain could soon become a favorite in the legalization of teenage sex "(source: Federal Internet edition of "Capital of the country," Yashin GA).
Surprisingly perspicacious about Britain was Vladimir Solouhin — creator of "stones on the palm of your hand," the book, which he wrote in the 60's and 80's. last century.
"In the British Parliament, one speaker gave the other members of parliament Smartest kind of trap. Open a discussion question the young. He announced from the rostrum of the four expressions of different people about the youth. Here they are, these expressions:
1. Our young people love luxury, it is ill mannered, she mocks niskolechko superiors and does not respect the elderly. Our kids today are tyrants, they do not stand up when the room comes to the old man, perechat their parents. Simply put, they are very bad.
2. I have lost all hope regarding the future of our country if the youth of tomorrow will take the reins of government, because these young people are unbearable, insufferable, just terrible.
3. Our world is headed for critical stage. Kids no longer obey their parents. Apparently, the end of the world is not very far.
4. This youth was corrupt to the core. Young people are insidious and dishonest. They will never take a walk on the youth of yore. The young people of the present day or not be able to preserve our culture.
All these sayings of young people about the impending death of culture, of a hopeless future were met with applause in Parliament. Then she opened the card. It turns out that the first sentence belongs to Socrates (470-399 years before our era), the second — Hesiod (720 years before our era), the third — the Egyptian Priest (2000 years before our era), and the fourth found in a clay pot in the ruins of Babylon, and the age of the pot — 3000 years.
It turned out very nicely in the parliament, and even funny. But all these cultures and the truth is lost. And the pot is found, how annoying it did not sound in the middle of the ruins of Babylon, and not in the thriving city. " (Vladimir Solouhin, "Stones in the palm of your hand").
In the end, in the middle of the English there is a perception that the UK — just behind its army and medicine — will collapse in 20 years. And the reason for the submission of the decay of the United Kingdom are: the desire to be self-contained, together with Scotland, and the county of Cornwall says:
rity has required the English county of Cornwall. Birthplace of Celtic culture that gave the world the cerebral character countless legends — King Arthur, no longer wishes to be part of the United Kingdom.
Once a year, engineer John Sweetman wears a costume crier, so the central square of the capital of Cornwall — Truro town — to announce the celebration of the day or St. Piran. The descendants of the old Britons believe that their patron saint.
Cornish land rich in tin and, according to tradition, specifically Piran melted in your own hearth first pewter cross. So, here comes Tipo Cornish flag — white cross on a black as ash, cloth.
Cornwall — the most southern part of Britain, and probably the most British of non-English provinces. Of half a million local residents in their native places for these Cornish language fluently reads only about 300 people. But those who raise the black-and-white flags, are convinced that the United Kingdom — is separately "(source: "Navigator").
As easy to see on the surface of the issue — again, economics, not politics. The key to the restoration of independence, which in Cornwall recently recalled in the XV century, is a tin.
Well, as an additional incentive for independence from Britain is probably rotting British morale.
— Especially for topwar.ru